Saving AdobeRGB+sRGB

[Björn Carlén]

I don't know whether this belongs in the Publishing department instead of here. I let the admins decide.
Normally I save both a RAW file and a small jpeg on the memory card when shooting – the RAW file for postprocessing and the jpeg for instant sharing on the web.
Now, the problem with this is that RAWs preferably should be shot in Adobe RGB, while the jpegs have to be sRGB to look good in browsers.
I'm sure someone in this forum has a solution to this problem, but I do not. Is there any way of assigning different color profiles to the two different files, in camera? And if there isn't, wouldn't that be a great feature for a future camera?
My gear is mainly the D600 and the Oly EM-10.

[Bjørn J]

RAW-files have no colour profile "baked in". You assign whatever profile you wish when you convert the file. You can safely assign sRGB in-camera, and change that to AdobeRGB if the NEF-converter defaults to sRGB.

[Björn Carlén]

I knew someone would have the answer for me
Thanks a lot, Bjørn J?
So, when I open a RAW-file in Lr or ACR, it's  got no color profile attached to it until I save it in another format, is that what you're saying? Or does it depend on how my Lr is set up? "Convert file to your chosen working color space". If the latter is true, is there no loss of color information in the process?

[Jan Anne]

I've switched to sRGB for the same reason, my a7S bakes the most stunning JPG's I upload to the web without adjustments.

Only turn to the RAW files when tweaks are needed, but must admit I have a hardtime getting close to the OOC JPG rendering with Capture One.

I miss the Nikon days where Capture NX would give the baked rendering as a starting point instead of working with the raw RAW data...

[Bjørn J]

It's true that many of today's cameras produces really good jpg's. The D100 comes to mind, the NEF's were OK, but the jpg's were terrible.  Faster processors and better algorithms can now give high quality jpg's right out of camera.
But they are still jpg's, with all the limitations that implies. Almost all of my images are more or less processed in PS, my cameras record only RAW. If I need a quick and dirty jpg (which I rarely do) it is only a mouseclick away in ViewNX2, with the settings applied that I have done in-camera.

[Andrea B.]

As noted in the excellent answers above, the raw foto file is unaffected by your choice of aRGB or sRGB when shooting. The color profiles apply only to viewing Jpgs.

I'm adding a reminder that you must set a working color profile for the editing portion of your workflow in Lightroom (or other app). Then upon saving a final copy of a NEF or Jpg, you must specifically tag (or convert) the file with a color profile for later viewing. In most editors that viewing profile can be set as a default preference.

The working/editing color profile communicates between your pc/monitor and your foto editing app.
The viewing color profile with which you tag the foto file communicates between the browser in use and the pc/monitor on which the foto is being viewed.

Browsers have become more aware of the color profiles, but seems like most of us still use sRGB to ensure the best experience for viewers.

[pluton]

So, when I open a RAW-file in Lr or ACR, it's  got no color profile attached to it until I save it in another format, is that what you're saying? Or does it depend on how my Lr is set up? "Convert file to your chosen working color space". If the latter is true, is there no loss of color information in the process?

As I understand it, Lightroom is internally color managed, so for working with raw files, there is no color space to select.  Only upon creating an output---a file, or a print--- should/must a color space be selected.

[Frank Fremerey]

For best results you should shoot a colour reference like the Colour Checker Passport with the actual camera or in the actual lighting environment.

This colour reference is then used in the RAW converter to translate photon counts per pixel under the colour filter on top of the recording chip into actual physical colours.

From that reference point it is possible to choose an output profile like AdobeRGB or ProPhotoRGB or sRGB depending on what you intend to use the files for.

If you intend to print in a colour managed lab you should choose AdobeRGB same is if you later Convert to a CMYK gamut like ISO coated V2 ECI.

If you publish on the Web (PC, Mac, Android, Windos, iOS, Smartphone, Tablet, SmartTV) you should choose the sRGB ECI colour profile to output.

Find the current versions of the profiles here: http://www.eci.org/en/downloads

Note that later conversion is always lossy (AdobeRGB ist "bigger" so it is coarser too, sRGB is smaller so it is denser). If you need both, better do two output renderings in your RAW converter.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The camera can safely be set to Adobe RGB as this is just a nominal tag in the RAW file and mainly serves as a fail-safe device for input handling when you process the file later. Set default [output] colour space of jpgs to sRGB in your software that makes such files.

It is true current browser are increasingly aware of colour spaces, but there are limits to their awareness. For example, my RAW conversion, and the following steps in PS or similar programs, rely on a very wide gamut like ProPhoto RGB. If jpgs are made with this colour space and displayed on the web, even colour-space aware browser hiccup to show flat, lifeless images. Pull in the web jpg in an image processor and all is OK provided the original was properly tagged, even though it looks terrible in a browser.  Enforce sRGB output before uploading to the web and all the vibrancy returns on web images (well, only within the constraints of the narrower SRGB space obviously).

Needless to say, even the most meticulous attention to colour spaces and suchlike for the camera output is wasted unless all steps in your work flow support colour profiles and calibration.

[Bjørn J]

The camera can safely be set to Adobe RGB as this is just a nominal tag in the RAW file and mainly serves as a fail-safe device for input handling when you process the file later. Set default [output] colour space of jpgs to sRGB in your software that makes such files.

As I understand Björn C, he wants small jpg's in sRGB straight from the camera for instant sharing, without the need for software. Then the camera must be set to sRGB. He can then tag the RAW files with whatever colour space he wants in the converter.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

OK, with this constraint in place, sRGB in-camera is a necessity.

[Björn Carlén]

"  ...Then the camera must be set to sRGB. He can then tag the RAW files with whatever colour space he wants in the converter."

But can it be done without any losses in IQ? that's the question.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

This setting will not in any way influence image quality of the in-camera jpg, apart from the necessary adjustments of "extreme" colours. However, as colours would be massaged in a similar manner if posted on the web, it is more a question of when the change is to occur. A change is inevitable as sRGB is smaller than wide-gamut spaces.

[Bjørn J]

"  ...Then the camera must be set to sRGB. He can then tag the RAW files with whatever colour space he wants in the converter."

But can it be done without any losses in IQ? that's the question.

If you mean the RAW file, no. The in-camera colour space setting has no affect on the RAW file, as the RAW file itself has no colour space.

[Jan Anne]

Think the question was if there are downsides of shooting sRGB RAW files instead of ARGB.

I was taught early on to always shoot in ARGB RAW and publish in sRGB JPG so I assumed this was to capture as much usable (color) data as possible. But if I understand Bjørn J correctly this doesn't matter at all and one can shoot sRGB RAW files without loss of data.

If so I learned something today, got to love all the collective knowledge here at NG